From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from 1.mo5.mail-out.ovh.net ([188.165.57.91] helo=mo5.mail-out.ovh.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Rd0Uh-0004uS-JW for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 14:16:40 +0000 Received: from mail173.ha.ovh.net (b9.ovh.net [213.186.33.59]) by mo5.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with SMTP id C2817FFB88C for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:08:50 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:03:21 +0100 From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Message-ID: <20111220140321.GF7899@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <1323945034-19687-1-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> <1323945034-19687-2-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> <20111218130742.GE7899@game.jcrosoft.org> <20111219103109.GJ27267@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111219103109.GJ27267@pengutronix.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: *** PROBABLY SPAM *** [PATCH 01/12] oftree: add of_fix_tree() To: Sascha Hauer Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On 11:31 Mon 19 Dec , Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 02:07:42PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > HI, > > > > what is the impact on the binary size?? > > Don't know. Why should this have a great influence on binary size? I mean the whole rework?? Best Regards, J. _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox